Mass and gravity not connected?

[Thirdway]

I often wondered if the assumption that Mass and gravity are linked is incorrect. Instead it occurred to me that as the Universe expands it causes space time to warp just like air pockets in bread. I concluded that space time might not be uniform across the universe so different size pockets could form. Some could be large pockets of low density, others would be small pockets of very high density. Matter would simply condense into these pockets, much like rainwater fills a hole in the ground. Large low density pockets would condense gas clouds, high density could produce black holes. So, gravity would be caused by the pockets and not by the material that fills them.

If this was correct, it might be possible to great these bubbles independent of mass. A warp in space, a mass attractor.

Is that just crazy?

[Space Bat]

...dbl trouble

[Space Bat]

nope not really a little modification here and there and then it would be perfect

[Thirdway]

Can you explain why not?

[Space Bat]

Can you explain why not?

Was answering your question 'is that just crazy'

Hence the 'nope not really' at all line from me

[phat tony]

i like the way you think, i would agree with what you say. i feel you are taking about a total vacuum. create a total vacuum and everything around will race to fill that vacuum.

to drift a little from your point. build a pipe in space 100m in diameter and 5 hundred thousand miles long, place a craft inside that is super strong but also as fast a possible, seal both ends of the pipe and create a total vacuum inside the pipe and get the pilot of the craft to put the foot to the floor when the craft hits the end of the pipe remove the end cap.

i have no idea of the results, but i wonder what speed the craft would be able to travel and what speed would the matter out side the pipe rush in??????????????.

[Thirdway]

Yes, except it's not a vacuum as such, it's the energy of an expanding object stretched out, part of the energy has condensed to form matter which fills the spaces that form in the stretched energy field.

The way to travel would be to create two identical quantum warps in space. A vehicle in the first warp would appear in the second instantaneously. The warps would need to be far enough away from any matter, otherwise it would be attracted into the warp. The moment the vehicle appeared in the other warp, then it would be necessary to collapse the primary warp.

[acey]

I often wondered if the assumption that Mass and gravity are linked is incorrect. Instead it occurred to me that as the Universe expands it causes space time to warp just like air pockets in bread. I concluded that space time might not be uniform across the universe so different size pockets could form. Some could be large pockets of low density, others would be small pockets of very high density. Matter would simply condense into these pockets, much like rainwater fills a hole in the ground. Large low density pockets would condense gas clouds, high density could produce black holes. So, gravity would be caused by the pockets and not by the material that fills them.

If this was correct, it might be possible to great these bubbles independent of mass. A warp in space, a mass attractor.

Is that just crazy?

You say, "Matter would simply condense into these pockets, much like rainwater fills a hole in the ground." But rainwater fills a hole because of gravity, which is exactly the thing you're trying to explain by other means.

For your theory to make sense, you would first need to specify what distinguishes a "pocket" in space-time from space-time with no "pocket". Then find a way to predict the way in which the motion of matter would be affected by "pockets". Then show how, in the limit of low mass and low velocity, you recover Newton's law of graviation (the inverse square law). Then compare with the predictions of general relativity.

[Thirdway]

The pockets can be fluid. The relation of mass to mass can exist quite happily. Magnets and iron filings exhibit similar properties to gravity as do electrical forces inside an atom. the warps can flow though the fabric just like an air bubble in liquid.

Take a black hole. The star throws out its mass into space as particle energy. Eventually the star goes Super Nova. It expels it's mass in a huge explosion. The warp in space then holds only a fraction of the matter needed to keep it in balance. The warp itself cannot collapse, it attempts to rebalance by crushing down the remaining mass into a denser material. It crushes down to a singularity, yet it can never suck in sufficient mass to rebalance once at this tipping point because two attractive forces are at work, gravity and electrical attraction from the infinitely dense mass. The space time fabric continually crushes all matter down and it feeds without end from anything within its pull. It will never fill the warp again.

Different to planets, being less volatile they don't throw out their mass, they are stable because the space time fabric stays more or less balanced ( though I suspect there are planetary bodies where the mass doesn't exactly balance ).

Of course I'm not saying its correct. I just want to know if it's feasible.

[acey]

In order to address the points I've raised you should perhaps start by explaining what exactly you mean by "space time fabric". In general relativity this is a four-dimensional Riemannian manifold which is locally flat and Minkowskian. You can then define various geometric objects which can be identified with the gravitational field, leading to the Einstein field equations.

What happens in your theory?

[jsandse]

erm I have just been studying GR - don't you mean a Lorentzian manifold?

[Thirdway]

In order to address the points I've raised you should perhaps start by explaining what exactly you mean by "space time fabric". In general relativity this is a four-dimensional Riemannian manifold which is locally flat and Minkowskian. You can then define various geometric objects which can be identified with the gravitational field, leading to the Einstein field equations.

What happens in your theory?

Don't you think I have enough to study? I still haven't decided what EPs I need never mind 4 dimensional physics. LOL

I will get back to you after my dissertation. Be about 4 or 5 years.

[acey]

erm I have just been studying GR - don't you mean a Lorentzian manifold?

I should have said pseudo-Riemannian manifold; a Lorentzian manifold is a special type of pseudo-Riemannian manifold and is indeed the particular type of relevance to GR.

Thirdway - good luck with your studies (and the EPs!).

[Capricorn]

How about no gravity is in A attracts B.

Mass warps space and it is this which we interpret as Gravity.

In which case there is no gravity as is taught, just mass and a none uniform ST. If one well is sufficently close to another they will move towards each other.

Newtonian mechanics can supply equations to interpret what we see but the fuller situation falls into Einsteins area.

[Thirdway]

I'm saying that mass does not affect space, mass only affects mass, gravity is the fabric of space warped through expansion. There is a nil space in the fabric. Space is stretched by expansion, something is stretched it develops tears and folds. Nature doesn't like true space so matter rushes in to fill the space during the early part of the formation of the universe. As the Universe continues to expand the violence of the initial stretching begins to settle down as time expands with it.

[Trickystar1]

Surly mass would always give off energy.